4.0376 Responses: TEI; On Technology (2/52)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Wed, 8 Aug 90 16:42:42 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 0376. Wednesday, 8 Aug 1990.


(1) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 90 01:22:10 EDT (17 lines)
From: Robert Hollander <bobh@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Subject: Re: 4.0371 Text Encoding Initiative Guidelines Available

(2) Date: Wed, 08 Aug 90 12:02:56 MDT (35 lines)
From: Skip Knox <DUSKNOX@IDBSU>
Subject: Re: 4.0369 Technology

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 90 01:22:10 EDT
From: Robert Hollander <bobh@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Subject: Re: 4.0371 Text Encoding Initiative Guidelines Available

It is perhaps supernumerary to do so, but the Rutgers/Princeton folks
would like to habe a copy. It is perhaps also unnecessary to send a
preliminary gesture of gratitude in the direction of M. S-M and all
those who have labored so hard and long. Nonetheless, it is worth
remarking that some people are willing to wager that their effort on
behalf of colleagues yet unknown (and even yet unborn) will one day
be grateful that some fellow humans were willing to make a major
commitment of their lives to make all of theirs at least a little
better. Willard comes to mind, and many another. The nicest thing
we can say about them is that their ambition is to be forgotten in
a future which works better. In all the small (and sometimes large)
hassles on HUMANIST we at times forget not only what we have in common
but how useful the enterprise may one day be.
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------44----
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 90 12:02:56 MDT
From: Skip Knox <DUSKNOX@IDBSU>
Subject: Re: 4.0369 Technology

I will gladly move the argument away from historical grounds at Willard's
request. I thought the analogy misleading as said so; but, I think the
underlying worrying is wrong too. That the inventor gets trapped by his
own invention is a lovely poetic insight but that does not make it a
sociological or historical insight.

The only trap that I see is a fairly mundane one, though real for all
that; namely, that an individual can get so entranced by the machine
that he or she forgets to do scholarship and becomes a computer jock.
Even that, though, is not bad unless that person refuses to recognize
that she has made a de facto career change. That does happen. People
have been fired for such things, though not so far as I know in academia.

I'm sorry, but not only do I fail to see what is insidious about this
information revolution but I fail to see the point in inquiring. Are we
trying to anticipate what _might_ be bad? Why not concentrate on what is
actually bad or forseeably bad? Things like hacking, for example. The
media may provide new opportunities for crime or sin or injustice, but
that is hardly grounds for concern about the electronic medium itself.

In short, I'm not worried, I'm excited. Can you be more specific,
Willard?

-= Skip =-

Ellis 'Skip' Knox, Ph.D.
Historian, Data Center Associate
Boise State University INTERNET: DUSKNOX@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU
1910 University Drive BITNET: DUSKNOX@IDBSU
Boise, Idaho 83725
(208) 385-1315